Hampton v. County of Allen et al

Filing 10

OPINION AND ORDER: Hampton is GRANTED leave to proceed against the Allen County Sheriff in his official capacity for injunctive relief to obtain medical treatment for a lost dental filling and a flesh-eating fungi on his feet and shins; the Clerk is DIRECTED to add the Allen County Sheriff in his official capacity as a defendant and to transmit summons and USM-285 for the Allen County Sheriff to the USMS, along with a copy of the complaint and this order; the USMS is DIRECTED to effect ser vice of process on the Allen County Sheriff by 4/14/2017; the Allen County Sheriff is ORDERED to respond, as provided for in the Fed. R. Civ. P. and NDIN L. R. 10-1(b), only to the claim for which Hampton has been granted leave to proceed in this sc reening order; the Allen County Sheriff is ORDERED, by 5/8/2017, to file under seal and to serve on Hampton his pertinent medical records and a report describing his medical condition and what treatment he has received for his lost dental filling an d the flesh-eating fungi on his feet and shins; all other claims alleged in the complaint, including those against County of Allen, Cook, Walton, and Nurse, are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge Philip P Simon on 4/10/2017. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(lhc)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
FORT WAYNE DIVISION
EDWARD M. HAMPTON,
Plaintiff,
v.
COUNTY OF ALLEN, COOK, WALTON,
and NURSE,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Cause No. 1:17-cv-127

OPINION AND ORDER
Edward M. Hampton is a prisoner who has been barred from proceeding in
forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), except on claims alleging that he is under
imminent danger of serious physical injury. See Hampton v. Cox, No. 1:16-cv-354 (S.D.
Ind. Aug. 5, 2016) (DE 15); Hampton v. Smith, No. 1:16-cv-854 (S.D. Ind. Aug. 24, 2016)
(DE 11); Hampton v. Matthews, No. 1:16-cv-2237 (S.D. Ind. Aug. 25, 2016) (DE 5);
Hampton v. Roberts, No. 1:16-cv-563 (S.D. Ind. Aug. 26, 2016) (DE 17).
In his complaint, Hampton alleges that he is in imminent danger because he is
being denied medical treatment by an unnamed nurse at the Allen County Jail. (DE 1.)
Specifically, he claims that he has not received treatment for a dental filling he lost on
February 6, 2017, and that he is in severe pain. He also alleges he is being denied
treatment for flesh-eating fungi on his feet and shins, which he believes may result in
the loss of both feet. These allegations satisfy the “imminent danger standard,” and he
has been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis so that he can pursue injunctive

relief to obtain medical treatment for his these medical conditions. See generally AbdulWadood v. Nathan, 91 F.3d 1023, 1025 (7th Cir. 1996).
However, Hampton is suing an unnamed nurse, who is not the proper defendant
for this injunctive relief claim. It is the Allen County Sheriff in his official capacity who
is responsible for providing adequate medical care at the Allen County Jail. Therefore,
the Allen County Sheriff will be added as a defendant.
A second problem with Hampton’s complaint is that the injunctive relief
Hampton seeks is transfer to another jail. That is not an appropriate remedy because
prisoners are “not entitled to demand specific care[, nor are they] entitled to the best
care possible.” Forbes v. Edgar, 112 F.3d 262, 267 (7th Cir.1997). Moreover, under the
Prison Litigation Reform Act, “[w]here prison conditions are found to violate federal
rights, remedial injunctive relief must be narrowly drawn, extend no further than
necessary to correct the violation of the Federal right, and use the least intrusive means
necessary to correct the violation of the Federal right.” Westefer v. Neal, 682 F.3d 679, 683
(7th Cir. 2012) (internal quotation marks, brackets, and citations omitted). For these
reasons, if injunctive relief is justified and therefore granted, it will be limited to
requiring the Allen County Sheriff to provide Hampton with medical treatment as
required by the U.S. Constitution.
“[A] preliminary injunction is an extraordinary and drastic remedy, one that
should not be granted unless the movant, by a clear showing, carries the burden of
persuasion.” Mazurek v. Armstrong, 520 U.S. 968, 972 (1997). To obtain preliminary
2

injunctive relief, the moving party must demonstrate that he or she has a reasonable
likelihood of success on the merits, lacks an adequate remedy at law, and will suffer
irreparable harm if immediate relief is not granted. Girl Scouts of Manitou Council, Inc. v.
Girl Scouts of U.S., Inc., 549 F.3d 1079, 1086 (7th Cir. 2008). Before I can decide whether a
preliminary injunction is appropriate in this case, I need more information. Therefore, I
will order the Allen County Sheriff to file a report about Hampton’s medical condition
and what treatment he has received for his lost dental filling and the flesh-eating fungi
on his shins and feet.
Last, Hampton’s complaint alleges two additional claims that are unrelated to his
medical claims—specifically that he was denied access to the law library by Allen
County and Captain Cook and that his mail was confiscated by Lieutenant Walton.
“Unrelated claims against different defendants belong in different suits[.]” George v.
Smith, 507 F.3d 605, 607 (7th Cir. 2007). These claims are unrelated to Hampton’s
medical claims and do not allege imminent danger. Therefore, they will be dismissed
without prejudice. See Wheeler v. Wexford Health Sources, Inc., 689 F.3d 680, 683 (7th Cir.
2012). If Hampton wants to pursue these claims (which are unrelated to each other), he
needs to file two separate lawsuits for which he must pre-pay the $400 filing fee for
each one.
Accordingly:
(1) Hampton is GRANTED leave to proceed against the Allen County Sheriff in
his official capacity for injunctive relief to obtain medical treatment for a lost dental
3

filling and a flesh-eating fungi on his feet and shins, which creates an imminent danger
of serious physical injury by causing severe pain and the possible loss of both feet;
(2) the Clerk is DIRECTED to add the Allen County Sheriff in his official
capacity as a defendant;
(3) the Clerk is DIRECTED to transmit summons and USM-285 for the Allen
County Sheriff to the U.S. Marshals Service, along with a copy of the complaint and this
order;
(4) the U.S. Marshals Service is DIRECTED, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d), to
effect service of process on the Allen County Sheriff by April 14, 2017;
(5) the Allen County Sheriff is ORDERED, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(g)(2), to
respond, as provided for in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Northern District
of Indiana Local Rule 10-1(b), only to the claim for which Hampton has been granted
leave to proceed in this screening order;
(6) the Allen County Sheriff is ORDERED, by May 8, 2017, to file under seal and
to serve on Hampton his pertinent medical records and a report describing his medical
condition and what treatment he has received for his lost dental filling and the flesheating fungi on his feet and shins;
(7) all other claims alleged in the complaint, including those against County of
Allen, Cook, Walton, and Nurse, are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
SO ORDERED.
ENTERED: April 10, 2017.
s/ Philip P. Simon
JUDGE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT